NOW I can debate the AV1611's

Phillip, perhaps you could ask them for scriptural support for their view. That usually shuts them up rather quickly, or they change the subject. I've asked for scriptural support for KJVOism on this board nearly 40 times. No KJVOist has ever provided any.

 

I have the Nelson av1611 replica. Is there any difference between the two?

 

Psalm 101:5 Whoso privily slandereth his neighbour, him will I cut off: him that hath an high look and a proud heart will not I suffer.

 

It may be out of print by now. I got mine about two years ago. It is a red hardcover. I'm not at home so I cannot look at the ISBN right now.

 

I have the Nelson 1611 but not the Hendrickson edition (yet). I think the main difference is that the Nelson version did not contain the translators' footnotes.

 

Mine does. Actually, they are side-notes - on the sides of the columns instead of on the bottom.

 

I guess it shows what they think about scripture. Not much.

 

I had both for awile. I never
saw any difference. They both had the
same error where the third page of Micah
has "Ioel" at the top

Note the most AV1611 believe the
real authorized version of 1611
(the 1611 edition) is a substandard Bible
for it contains the satanic Apocrypha
and the doubt causing translator margin
notes.

 

I had heard that this was the only one in print; obviously, that little tid-bit of information was wrong. Maybe one of them is now out of print. I dunno?

I would imagine that we have the same book. My ISBN number is: 1-56563-162-5. </font>[/QUOTE]The Thomas Nelson edition of the 1611 is now out of print. I have both the Thomas Nelson 1611,
and the Hendrickson 1611. I also have a copy of the 1611 in the original Gothic print that was printed by Greyden Press in 2000. The Thomas Nelson & Hendrickson editions do leave out the 35 pages of "The Genealogies of Holy Scriptures" that was in the original 1611 and the page with the royal coat of arms [with the lion and unicorn]. So far, I haven't found any differences in the text of the three.

All three editions keep some of the original
printing errors in the 1611: the heading of Chapter III of Micah with the incorrect heading "Joel," a double "the the" at Ezekiel 23:23, "aud immediately" instead of "and immediately" at Acts 3:7, "co" instead of "to"
at Acts 20:26, and the added 21 words at Exodus 14:10.

 

Pfalmes CI.5-7 (KJV1611):
Whoso priuily slandereth his
neighbor, him will I cut off : him that
hath an high looke, and a proud heart,
will not I suffer.
6 Mine eyes shall be vpon the faithful
of the land , that they may dwell
with me : he that walketh ||in a perfect
way, he shall serue me.
7 He that worketh deceit, shall not
dwell within my house : he that telleth
lies +shall not tarie in my sight.

sidenote showing a variant possible
translation: ||or, perfect in the way

sidenote showing a variant in the OT
sources available to the translator:
+Heb. shall not be established.

Yes this book is dangerous. It shows that
even the King James Version was translated
from sources that varried. IMHO any translation
that fails to have translator footnotes
is a hypocritical Bible. Unfortunately many
KJV1769 versions/edition have no translator
notes.

 

The 1611 edition of the KJV is also available
online.

Visit the following web address:

http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksnew/index.cfm?TextIB=kjbible

 

Phillip where did you get your AV1611 from?

 

Link does not work. I could not find on site.

 

While you're looking at your AV 1611s, please see the translators' marginal note for Psalm 12:7. That's what makes the KJVOs' argument for this verse's referring to God's words so amusing. Just goes to show that those who use that argument are merely following the Wilkinson-Ray-Fuller "party line".

 

"While you're looking at your AV 1611s, please see the translators' marginal note for Psalm 12:7. That's what makes the KJVOs' argument for this verse's referring to God's words so amusing. Just goes to show that those who use that argument are merely following the Wilkinson-Ray-Fuller "party line"."

Would you please quote that matginal note? I don't have an AV1611 and would be interested to see it. Thank you much!

 

Try: Christian Books.com